Uni

Except, of course, "Adventures on Earth," which represents the finest fifteen-minute marriage between music and film in history - which is why E.T. will retain the lead in this poll until it's over and done. - Uni....who also agrees that Empire of the Sun is one of the finest works of the 80's.

For "favorite," I'd have to go with Superman. But I've always felt a tug of regret that CE3K was released in the same year Star Wars was. If not for that, I think Williams would have six Oscars today, and each one well deserved. And that's what I said. - Uni

Hello and welcome. Always nice to see new faces around here.... First you ought to get registered, so we know what to call you. Then don't be shy; jump in and start throwing your subjective weight around. Let us know what you think. Why don't you bring him to the chat on Friday, Merkel? - Uni

Oh yeah....once upon a time, this thread was about something. I nearly forgot.... The list (both of them) belong to Schindler - but I agree that the list is short a couple of titles. JP and Far and Away are glaring absences, and it's a close race as to which I would choose as my favorite to receive a nomination (wait - did F&A get a nomination?). My fave of the 90's in general, however, is Hook. Listened to it again just last night, and was again swept away. - Uni

Oh, joy....a good ol' slugfest. This is hilarious. The irony screams. Our favorite JWMB Contrarian pointing the finger at someone else....as he stirs up contention about something he clearly doesn't understand. The "established conventions that exist for the years" are just as Ricard has stated them. 1980 is indeed the last year of the seventies. To say otherwise would be the same as me asking you to tell me what the first ten integers are, and you answering, "Zero, one, two, three...." and so on. You would count one to ten without thinking; the number ten is the last integer in that sequence. Just because people have taken the shortcut of defining decades by the number in the tens column doesn't alter fact. It's a "convention" now dictated by habit, which is fine, I suppose; but to argue against reality - citing "logic" - is ridiculous. I have to agree with this. I can learn to appreciate films from the forties and fifties, but I would never presume to truly understand the impact their original releases had on that generation of people. Similarly, I can understand the tragedy of JFK's death - and Stone's film and Williams score can contribute to the endeavor admirably - but I will never completely comprehend the emotions of that day. Where was I when Kennedy was shot? Nowhere yet, the proverbial glint in my father's eye, nothing more. In the same way, the events of 9/11 will shape my grandchildren's future (Lord willing I have some someday), but they will never fully perceive the awful weight of living through that day. (This is probably an extreme example of the concept we're discussing, but I think it's close enought to the mark.) Two people can quantitatively hear a particular score exactly the same number of times, but there is a definite qualitative difference if one of them grew up with the music, as opposed to encountering it later in life and cramming the same number of listening experiences into a much shorter period. This does not belittle the latter's taste, discrimination, or musical appreciation; it is simply approaching the same point from different perspectives. And having grown up with the scores of the late seventies and early eighties, to hear someone saying they "don't hold a candle" to the more recent "classics" makes me shake my head with wonder - though, since I consider it policy to regard the speaker's appreciation of convention and use of logic with a sizable grain of disbelief, I would hardly give much gravity to the saying of it. On the other hand.... *slapping my forehead* Great Caesar's Ghost....now I know I've heard it all. :roll: - Uni

Though I consider GoF the best in the HP canon so far (for all the excellent reasons previously stated), I also would have to choose PoA as my favorite, if only because it's probably the most fun story in the series. There's enough tension to wear out the edge of your seat, but the book almost cheerfully adopts the mood of a wide-eyed children's mystery adventure, never straying too far toward the curtain of authentic darkness. GoF, on the other hand, plunges past that curtain early on and stays there. There's nothing wrong with that, of course - Rowling deftly carries the somber burden of significance without waxing too maudlin, and it was about time the series matured into a graver adolescence - but the story paid for its tragic import by sacrificing some of the previous books' sheer entertainment. While GoF was a thoroughly good read as well, I'm hoping the rest of the series is able to alternate its moods as capably as the books that have gone before it; I would hate to see things digress into an endless queue of misfortune and doom, bloated with self-importance. Given Rowling's track record so far, however, I have no reason to believe this will happen. - Uni

Again, I don't know about the epithet "shameful", but there's no arguing your example. That has to be one of the biggest unintentional laughs in recent cinema history - and perhaps the biggest that Williams himself was a part of (though again, my first impulse is to blame Lucas for the idea). - Uni

Your best post in ages, Joe - particularly the insightful (and absolutely true) observation that fear of emotional display is a far greater weakness than the display itself. - Uni

There are two lines of reasoning to this, I think. The first has to do with the viewer's interpretation and reaction, the second with the composer's scoring choices. First, there are some people (particularly men, though not exclusively) who, for whatever reason, deliberately distance themselves from anything that might provoke an emotional reaction. Perhaps they don't want to appear weak, don't want to acknowledge that sort of vulnerability, whatever. So they hold themselves above such petty emotions - and resent anything that draws out their feelings in spite of their best efforts. I've known people like this who would use similar terminology (though probably not "shameless" - the word in itself is below them) to describe musical accompaniment that might cause such inadvertent passions to arise. In these cases, it's obviously not the composer's fault for trying to infuse the project with authentic ardor; he's just doing his job, and the rest of us thank him for it. There are, however, times when a composer certainly does go way too far over the top, trying to bleed a scene for every last emotion he thinks is there - whether it is or not. He believes the director can't fulfill the requirements of dramatic intent without his help; the audience must be shown that the hero is falling in love, that the soldier is sad that his best friend lies dying on the field of battle, that the end of the world is imminent, and so on. He fancies himself an organ grinder of silent film era, thinking that elements like dialogue, sound effects and subtext do not exist and cannot be communicated save that he should deign to provide them. Scoring like this calls immediate attention to itself, is instantly distracting, and separates itself entirely from the very story it should be supporting. You don't often see prime examples of this outside the B-movie realm (where the practice flourishes), but from time to time even a very good composer will insert himself too far into the scene, almost to the point where he very grants himself a little round sign-language-window in the corner of the screen; and there he stands, wildly gesticulating, trying to get you to understand the meaning of the action. In either case, I'm not sure that "shameless" is the right word for it, since I don't know that shame is something the composer ought to be feeling for his work, even if it is a hundred decibals to the wind. In the former case, it's the viewer's loss in choosing to live a passionless life; in the latter, it's just a matter of poor performance. As for the concept of a musical "cliche" or "trick", I am at a total loss. I find it impossible to imagine a composer bent over his staves, grinning wickedly to himself, thinking, they'll never see this coming....heh, heh.... They do the best job they can; sometimes it isn't enough (or it's way too much). I'm with those of you (especially you, Mr. Barnsbury) who agree that music is meant to evoke emotion, and that allowing such things to sweep us away is one of the premier joys in life - and anytime a composer connects with his audience, the last thing he should feel is shame. - Uni

I was about to post a new reminder, scissorhands, but you beat me to it. Here's hoping for another good one today.... - Uni

Yes, Joe, I read your clever small print in advance of my response. Believe it or not, I was just commenting on the show. Hope I didn't get in the way. - Uni

Hey....I liked Battlestar Galactica. 'Course, I was a kid when it was first on, and I was starry-eyed with space adventures anyway, but it stuck with me. The acting was goofy, but no worse than anything else on T.V. at the time. It had an epic storyline, at least in concept - the single warship leading a fleet of desperate survivors, harassed by their genocidal enemies - and terrific effects (for the time). It also sported one of the grandest scores ever penned for television, thanks to Stu Phillips. Sadly, it didn't take long to deteriorate in quality....and the final stretch, the absolutlely insipid Galactica: Earth (or whatever it was called) turned out to be one of the worst shows ever perpetrated on the unfortunate viewing audience. And the reason it came out two years hence to Star Wars was because it was a deliberate attempt to hitch a ride on the movie's success in the T.V. markets. (So was Buck Rogers, but that didn't fare quite as well.) - Uni

While I appreciate your efforts, Merkel, it's important not to underestimate the subtle nuances of language. Accuracy is vital! The slightest alterations in morphology can have drastic effects on translation and communicated meaning. Your careless transliteration of Lapti Nek is a prime example of this. By beginning the sentence with "Ubi," you have opted for the predicate nominative usage - not altogether wrong, but it has the potential to cause misunderstanding, especially given the rather sensitive nature of what is being said. The double-"hau", however, expresses the imperative voice so strongly that it may serve to balance the final effect. What a drastic change a few simple conjugations can make! Even if we overlook the glaring misuse of the participle, choosing the adverbial "high road" takes us into an altogether different linguistic realm, certainly one not without perils of its own. I do note how you've cleverly shifted to the genative absolute, quite removing yourself from the dangers of the periphrastic tense - and thereby nicely avoiding total blame for an incident that was probably an accident to begin with. In the end, though, the best way to clarify the differences shifting a few phonics can cause is to translate both sentences. The first, as you know, reads, "Your landspeeder is double-parked." The second, after only a minor alteration, reads, "I think I just ran over your dentist with my landspeeder." I hope this little demonstration has shown you how critical it is to be accurate in your transliterations. - Uni....who wonders if he takes philology a little too far sometimes....

Excellent thread. One of the best I've read in a good while. I'm not one of those who believes that we should only discuss film scores to the exclusion of all other subjects, but it does seem like we get fewer and fewer threads that pry into the primary topic of this forum the way that this one did. Kudos to everyone who's contributed all these intelligent responses. You deserve particular praise, Neil, for starting things off so well. Whether we agree or disagree with you, you state your case so well it's hard to disprove your assertions outright. And I did find myself agreeing with you....but, interestingly enough, I also found myself agreeing with many others here, even those taking a contrary point of view. For my part, I think you're right in saying the theme belongs to the later episodes, and is central to Vader himself as the chief representative of the Empire in those films. (Yes, the Emporer was the head honcho, but Vader was the face of the Empire, the black-hatted - helmeted? - villain who represented the audience's first and deepest connection with the tyranny of the Evil Republic, right down to his personal conversion at the end acting as the microcosm of the Rebellion overcoming the Empire.) By the time the events of ESB begin to unfold, he has attained such prominence (as you suggested) that any action by the Empire is an extension of either his wishes or the Emporer's - and in most cases both. Therefore, in those places in ROJ where a quick theme insertion is needed for action on the part of the Empire's minions, Vader's tune is obviously preferable over some jazzed-up, bellicosed version of the Emporer's Theme (although it is kinda fun to think about what that might've sounded like.... ). However, as much as I have to agree from a technical point of view....I also found its use in AOTC very moving from a strictly emotional perspective. It's placement as a militaristic counterpoint to the sweeping, epic marriage scene (as I've said before, one of the few effective scenes between Anakin and Amidala, IMO) is so effective that it's hard to imagine it being done any differently. The ANH Imperial Theme wouldn't have carried the day; frankly, it was used mostly as a transitional device in that film, and never bore much weight as a theme unto itself. Playing those four notes over and over would hardly have expressed what was needed as the clones took off in their mini-Star Destroyers (Star Annoyers?). And, as has been expressed, the theme for the battle droids had been misused enough in the film already. (Though in a sense, it's appearance during Obi-Wan's inspection ironically reflects the paradox that plagued even the title of the film itself. The clones as mischaracterized as "attacking" - which is true, I suppose, if you're looking at it from the bad guys' point of view; but a standard good vs. evil epic ought to side with the protagonist's perspective.) He had to do something; either create a seperate palette for that one scene, or use one of the themes available to him. Which one, then? The Imperial March? The Clones' Theme? A heightened version of the Emporer's Theme? The Bicycle Chase? (My personal choice.... ) I think that, no matter what he chose, someone would have objected to it on similar grounds. Nothing prior to that scene could really express (accurately) what was taking place in the larger sceme of things; but to use another "future" theme (as he did) would have drawn the same criticism. All of which brings up what I think is the crux of the matter: this particular series of films has become a thematic minefield for Williams. It's been said a thousand times how his score for ANH all but resurrected the Wagnerian technique of leitmotif, the art of establishing musical phrases that can later be used to ellucidate characters or concepts. How interesting, then, that the selfsame series that innovated the technique should be produced in so out-of-order a manner that there are finally two chronologies at work: "real time" (so to speak) and the SW timeline. Should Williams be required to honor one of these to the total exclusion of the other? Is it wrong for him, knowing that we do know what's going to happen in the future of this story (it's hardly presumptious to say as much) to make preemptive thematic references, such as those that might foreshadow the eventual strength of the Empire, long before they find their full fruition - knowing that he knows that we know (that, uh....he knows)? What method can he apply that will please everyone? There are two other elements that factor in here as well. The first is sheer effect. We know Williams to be someone who often orders the selections of his released scores more in deferrence to the listening experience than to honor the chronological order of the film. We've argued whether this is right or wrong, but in the end, it is his decision as the creative artist whose works these are. I would submit the same impulse is at work here - that he did it just because it sounded good. And honestly, I don't think Williams himself is as obsessed with thematic accuracy as we are. That's not to say that he would've stuck Leia's Theme in that scene "just because it sounded good"; but given the opportunity to create an effective mood using a theme that could be said to apply, I think he wouldn't lose much sleep over the decision. The second factor has to do with the overriding creative source, too often forgotten in these discussions, I think. The director/composer relationship is not often (is rarely, in fact) as cohesive and second-nature as the one shared by Williams and Spielberg. Most of the time, the director tells the composer what he wants, and it's the composer's obligation to fulfill his desires to the best of his abilities. I personally believe that's why we see so much of this dreaded "plagiarism" in film scores today. Directors love to temp track their editing process (even their shooting process sometimes), after which they'll hand the temped music over to the composer and say, "This is what I want." So that's what the composer gives them. Now, while I don't believe this is what took place between Lucas and Williams in this case (unless George handed him the CD's for the original trilogy and said, "This is what I want"), I do think it may have been as much Lucas's idea to use the themes in AOTC the way they appeared as it was John's. (Keep in mind, this is the guy who has no compunctions about taking what Williams has done and shredding it to pieces for the sake of latent editing changes.) In the end, I don't know that there is a pat answer to any of this. What I do know, however, is that it makes for a great discussion...! Thanks again, Neil, and to the rest of you as well. - Uni....who hasn't had a really lengthy post like this in too long to remember....

Incidentally....why the heck won't this thing add my signature any more? I've tried three times to update it, and it still won't work.... - Uni

About half an hour away now....I've got a good feeling about this one.... - Uni

Oh, this won't do at all.... If we can neither praise nor bash SW, all we can do is acknowledge its existence - and what fun is that? We come here to exchange opinions, and that will always give way to some sparring, but that's part and parcel of any forum like this. As long as neither side claims that their subjective observations are either totally exclusive or inherently right then there shouldn't be any trouble with it. (If you allow others' perspectives to affect you in a personal way....well, that's your own business, but not much good will come of it, and it doesn't mean we have to muzzle our discussions to account for it.) And ultimately your "truce" rings false, since later in the thread you assert that you really don't mind discussing SW with people who own to "similar opinions." S'up to you, but I think sitting around talking with people who I know will do nothing but agree with me stifles the learning process, and eventually grows unutterably dull. Just my opinion, though.... - Uni

Great selections, difficult choice....until I saw "E.T. and Me" in there, and then it was over. I've always considered this (concert version) one of his most beautiful and moving works. It has a purity to it that transcends almost anything I've heard. The one appropriately romantic piece (by your definition) that hasn't been mentioned that I would add to the list is "Cadillac of the Skies" (concert version) from Empire of the Sun. Now there's a piece to sweep you away.... On a similar note, both Always and Born on the Fourth find the best treatment of their respective themes on compilation albums. For those who wonder what the big deal is with the theme from Always, check out the Spielberg/Williams Compilation, and you'll understand. The score as a whole wanders somewhat aimlessly - like its source film - but the theme itself is wonderful. The main motif for Born was, I thought, a little deflated in the film itself, but that's probably because I first heard it on the Greatest Hits CD, where it's rendered with such heart-wrenching passion that I could easily see why some people call it their favorite (and I think this also belongs on this list before some of the others, but hey.... ). I also agree with some of you in wondering why Far and Away garners so little attention around here. No question, it's one of his best of the post-"Indy Wars" and pre-"Schindler's Park" era (aside from Hook, of course). - Uni

Short for "Universal Studios." I picked up the nick in high school, when I went to the cinema mecca with a group of friends. At the time, I was desperate to become a director, so going the theme park was like coming home again. They awarded me the name as a result, not without affection, and I carried it (proudly) for years. I named the hard drive on my first computer "UniMaster" (the handle I used on the last board), so when I joined up here, the nick seemed the most fitting for this purpose. I can't explain the avatar, because I still don't have one! Sorry Ricard, but that's one thing I can't stand about this current forum - you can't just list an address for avatar assignment. It has to be a certain height, width, etc. and I can't find one I like that's just the right size. Any help on this, anyone...? - Uni

Let's try to get another good chat going this week. We had about seven in there at one time last week. Didn't last long, but it was fun while it did. Kinda like the old days.... There was a time once when we actually committed to the weekly chat. It took a while to get it in full swing, but there was a period of a couple months there when we had a full room every week. It'd be great to get back to that point again. But, like public television, it can't happen without your support.... I'll be in around 5 pm EST or a little after. I'll try to stick around for a good while, so there'll be at least one person in there if you decide to give it a try. Let's see if we can't get another good turnout. - Uni

This was brought up in the chatroom the other day, much to my delight. As I explained then, I missed seeing past the beginning of the second season during its first run, and had to wait years to get around to it again. Then last year, a local syndicated station began running them every night, from the beginning and in order. I devoured them, taping each one, and was ready for the Dominion war to begin in earnest - and then, the night after the last fourth season episode....they skipped to the middle of the sixth season. Overnight, their uniforms changed, they forgot about the Dominion, and suddenly everyone's mourning Morn (for god's sake, why? ) Needless to say, I was hacked. I stopped watching - didn't want to see how things turned out before I saw how they turned up - and waited for them to repeat the cycle, which they finally did. I waited patiently through the fourth season again....and on the night the fifth should have started....they switched to the Cosby Show. Fortunately, whilst in the midst of preparations for hari kari, I heard about the new DVD sets. S'about time! Can't wait to finally see what's ahead, especially 'Troubles and Tribblations', six shows into the fifth season...! Though radically different from the previous (and subsequent) ST shows, this was Trek at its finest. The dramatic tension was more palpable, the characters drawn from circumstance rather than convenience....and they finally learned how to really use the sci-fi not just to create conflict but to explore possibilities and emotions unavailable to the realm of "reality." Shows like 'Duet', 'The Visitor', 'Hard Time' and 'Visionary' were some of the best hours TV had to offer (and proved that those who think ST is just about phasers and Klingons and silly sci-fi haven't a clue). Good stuff. Can't wait. 'Nuff said. - Uni

I do agree with that, and concur with what Roger Ebert wrote about the film: "This is the best-looking bad movie I've ever seen." - Uni

Finally, for once....I'll be checking in. (Although it says someone's using my name.... :? ) - Uni

It's the prodigal season....it is kinda nice, though, to see so many of those I've known since a couple of boards ago migrating back at the same time. Nothing against the new people, certainly - l like a lot of the stuff I've been catching up on - but it's good to see some familiar "faces," too. If you mean to the Other Topics board....absolutely not! This "topic" is unique, but it concerns the board in general. I for one want to see how things are going with other folks around here, and if they've been gone for a while, it's good to know they're coming back - without having to go to the other board (which probably isn't frequented by even half of the current constituency here) to find out about it. By the way....got a good laugh off your most recent "innovation," Stefan. I heartily approve. - Uni

Again, I disagree. I think it works not only on a practical level, but on an eminently emotional one too. The purpose of the game itself is to wake people up. Nicholas Van Orten, as rich and succussful as he was, was stuck in a rut, all but doomed to a one-track life by events that began with his father's suicide. He hid behind money and status; he barely acknowledged the people who inhabited his everyday life. What he needed was a kick in the pants, a major paradigm shift, something that would open his eyes and help him to begin living his life. That's what CRS gave him. In the words of the CRS representative, they provide "what's missing," and they followed through with their promise. That's why his brother wanted him to do it; that's why everyone who knew him agreed to get involved; that's why his associates congratulated him on his choice, saying they envied him, going through it the first time as he was. They knew he needed it, and ending justified their hopes. I'm not sure any experience less intense would have been sufficient to get his attention. On that level, I don't see this as a "big joke," as you say; I think it's almost clinical, a form of intense therapy, presented as a game in order to keep the "patient" in the proper, uninformed state of mind (if he or she knew, it would significantly dampen the experience). Ultimately Van Orten knows this to be the case, and that's why he thanks his brother. If he had gone postal, as you suggested, it would've meant that Orten was incapable of change, that he was so haunted and obsessed with death that nothing could free him from it. What a hopeless story (and ending) that would have been.... And the bit about someone trying to steal his money for real....that would have taken what was developing as a fascinating twist and turned it into standard thriller fare. The rich guy gets taken by some shadowy corporate schemers, yah, yah. Nothing wrong with it, I guess, but been there, done that. The ending as it stands was one of the most satisfying surprises I've had at the movies in a good while, something that hadn't been done before. Good or bad, there's a lot to be said for originality. Gently are you revenged for my testing of your heart at our first meeting. - Galadriel, The Fellowship of the Ring Touche. Y'got me. I missed the sarcasm. Hopefully it won't take such measures to get me going in the future.... - Uni